Tag Archives: decides

Sha’Carri vs Shericka ANCHOR SHOWDOWN decides EPIC 4×100 between USA and Jamaica | NBC Sports – NBC Sports

  1. Sha’Carri vs Shericka ANCHOR SHOWDOWN decides EPIC 4×100 between USA and Jamaica | NBC Sports NBC Sports
  2. World Athletics Championships 2023: Sha’Carri Richardson leads USA to 4x100m relay gold over Jamaica’s superstars Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce and Shericka Jackson Olympics
  3. U.S. women’s 4×400 relay team disqualified from World Championships after disasterous handoff mistake Yahoo Sports
  4. Sha’Carri Richardson Beats Fraser Pryce, Shericka Jackson Again As USA Win 4 by 100m Relay Sports Brief
  5. U.S. take double gold in sprint relays Reuters
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Romeo Lavia decides to join Chelsea over Liverpool – The Athletic

  1. Romeo Lavia decides to join Chelsea over Liverpool The Athletic
  2. Chelsea set to BREAK British transfer record for Caicedo as Brighton make £111m profit! 🤑🔵 Sky Sports Premier League
  3. ‘Just Completed’: Chelsea Now on the Verge of Star Signing After Latest Development Last Word On Sports
  4. Transfer news live updates: Moises Caicedo joins Chelsea; Romeo Lavia chooses Chelsea over Liverpool The Athletic
  5. ‘Here we go confirmed’ for new Chelsea striker deal on busy night for Blues Chelsea News
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Canadian court decides class-action lawsuit against Fortnite can proceed

A Canadian court has approved a class-action lawsuit against the creators of Fortnite, Epic Games.

We first reported that the Canadian legal firm was preparing a class-action lawsuit against Epic Games back in 2019. It accused the developer of “knowingly” creating the “very, very addictive game”, Fortnite, but had been in limbo ever since as the court assessed whether or not the case could proceed.

Now, however, it seems the court agrees with the plaintiff that the claim “does not appear to be frivolous or manifestly ill-founded” and, according to CTV News, just because there’s “no certainty” that Epic created an “addictive” game it “does not preclude the possibility that the game is in fact addictive and that its creator and distributor are presumed to know this”.

Eurogamer Newscast: What did we think of The Game Awards 2022? The good, the bad, and the Keighley.

“Epic Games, when they created Fortnite, for years and years, hired psychologists – they really dug into the human brain and they really made the effort to make it as addictive as possible,” Alessandra Esposito Chartrand, an attorney with Calex Légal, said at the time. “They knowingly put on the market a very, very addictive game which was also geared toward youth.”

Likening the case to the 2015 class-action suit against tobacco companies that saw the Quebec Superior Court ruling determine tobacco companies didn’t do enough to warn their customers about the dangers of smoking, Chartrand believes Epic knew Fortnite was “as addictive as possible” and failed in their duty to warn players of the risk of addiction. Consequently, the legal challenge is “very centred on the duty to inform”.

The legal notice – which was initially filed on behalf of the parents of two minors, who had been aged 10 and 15 at the time, although other parents have since joined the lawsuit – also drew on the decision of the World Health Organisation to list gaming disorder as a disease.

“In our case, the two parents that came forward and told [us], ‘If we knew it was so addictive it would ruin our child’s life, we would never have let them start playing Fortnite or we would have monitored it a lot more closely’,” Chartrand added.

To play the game, users must surrender their right to sue the company as part of its terms of use and instead go through individual arbitration, but Chartrand believes the terms of service “don’t stand up in court in Quebec because the province’s Consumer Protection Act requires companies to clearly disclose risks associated with products or services”.

“The Court is of the opinion that the facts alleged with respect to the plaintiffs’ children make it possible to claim, if we put them in relation to the statements of certain experts with respect to the creation of an addiction to video games, and more particularly to Fortnite, that the plaintiffs have a valid product liability claim against the defendants,” the recent ruling states. “The claim does not appear to be frivolous or manifestly ill-founded.”

“There’s something about Fortnite that is completely unique. There are no other games that have therapy centres dedicated to players of that game,” Chartrand says.

Epic has 30 days to appeal the judgement.

“We have industry-leading Parental Controls that empower parents to supervise their child’s digital experience,” Epic spokesperson Natalie Munoz told PC Gamer. “Parents can receive playtime reports that track the amount of time their child plays each week, and require parental permission before purchases are made, so that they can make the decisions that are right for their family. We have also recently added a daily spending limit by default for players under the age of 13.

“We plan to fight this in court. This recent decision only allows the case to proceed. We believe the evidence will show that this case is meritless.”

fbq('init', '560747571485047'); fbq('init', '738979179819818');

fbq('track', 'PageView'); window.facebookPixelsDone = true;

window.dispatchEvent(new Event('BrockmanFacebookPixelsEnabled')); }

window.addEventListener('BrockmanTargetingCookiesAllowed', appendFacebookPixels);

Read original article here

Opinion | Elon Musk decides to set $44 billion investment in Twitter on fire

Comment

As Twitter advertisers run for the exits, the world’s richest man has apparently decided to set his $44 billion investment on fire.

Some might say Elon Musk, who last week became Twitter’s official new owner, has buyer’s remorse. But that implies he had actually wanted the thing before he bought it. Back in April, the mercurial billionaire made an overpriced takeover bid, which he then tried to back out of.

Perhaps understandably: Twitter has been plagued by problems for years, of both the monetary and moral kinds. When Musk made his offer, tech stocks were already tanking, and it was clear he had neither a plan for fixing the company nor the inclination to fritter away a big chunk of his fortune figuring it out. After some legal back-and-forth, he reluctantly agreed to complete the $44 billion acquisition.

Now Musk, who’s also chief executive of Tesla and SpaceX (which don’t exactly seem as though they should be part-time jobs), is trying to figure out what to do with his new toy.

Follow Catherine Rampell‘s opinionsFollow

He has already begun pursuing a few controversial changes. They include charging users for their “blue check” verification badges, as well as developing a new paid-video feature, which will probably be used for “adult” material. But his most perplexing moves involve simultaneous plans to A) police content less, while B) increasing advertising revenue.

These objectives are somewhat at odds.

Musk has long complained about censorship at Twitter, including the suspension of high-profile accounts (such as that of former president Donald Trump) and other users accused of hate speech or baseless conspiracy theories (the latter being something Musk himself occasionally traffics in). For this reason, his takeover has been cheered by free-speech absolutists as well as racists, Holocaust deniers and other tinfoil-hat-wearers who claim they’ve been “shadow-banned” or otherwise muzzled for too long.

Look, I’m not going to pretend that finding the right degree of content moderation is an easy task. Humans cannot agree on what counts as “misinformation,” so it’s pretty hard to teach an algorithm to identify it. One man’s fake news is another man’s free speech. Allowing more hostile, off-color or otherwise dubious tweets will drive some users away, but banning them will infuriate other users (and some lawmakers), too.

Musk has made clear he’ll allow a lot more content that once would have been purged and punished by Twitter personnel — which is perhaps an easier strategy to implement if you’re considering laying off half your workforce.

Even before any concrete new content policy appears to have been implemented, legions of trolls and bigots have already begun testing the guardrails. In the 12 hours following Musk’s finalized purchase, use of the n-word on Twitter jumped nearly 500 percent, according to the Princeton-based Network Contagion Research Institute.

Advertisers, Twitter’s primary revenue source, are nervous about these developments, and what the platform might look like in the Musk era. Adidas may not want its logo appearing alongside, say, antisemitic tweets. (If you don’t believe me, ask Kanye West, now known as Ye.) Family-friendly brands are probably not excited about appearing next to porn, either.

IPG and Havas Media, both multinational advertising companies, have advised clients to pause spending on Twitter for the time being, and a consulting firm owned by IPG reports that most clients surveyed plan to take the recommendation.

Some consumer brands have already done so, including General Motors (a Tesla competitor). The Financial Times, citing inside sources, reported Wednesday that L’Oréal had also suspended its advertising spending on the platform; the company subsequently released a statement saying it had not made “any decision” about Twitter ads.

But one can understand why the global cosmetics and hair-care giant might feel conflicted about the issue: Skinheads probably don’t buy much shampoo, but they might be in the market for new sunscreen.

Musk’s initial response to advertisers’ concerns was to assure brands that Twitter won’t devolve into a “free-for-all hellscape” (too late, methinks). When that strategy didn’t work, he tried to cyberbully them into sticking around. In a Twitter poll posted Wednesday, he asked his followers whether advertisers should support “freedom of speech” or “political ‘correctness.’ ”

It is hard to imagine that this strategy will be successful. Either Target and Pepsi and the like think it’s a good use of their ad dollars to share a platform with neo-Nazis and incels, or it isn’t. The whole thing reminds me a bit of progressives’ recent attempts to scold and punish companies into lowering their prices, rather than change the incentives those firms face.

Musk and the Democratic Party may not have much in common these days. But perhaps they can bond over this one shared experience: They’re both learning how hard it is to shame companies into doing something that isn’t in their financial interest to do.



Read original article here

Alex Jones: Jury decides conspiracy theorist should pay nearly $1 billion in damages to Sandy Hook families for his lies about the school massacre



CNN Business
 — 

Far-right talk show host Alex Jones should pay eight families of Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims and one first responder $965 million in compensatory damages, a Connecticut jury decided Wednesday, capping a wrenching weeks-long trial that put on display the serious harm inflicted by the conspiracy theorist’s lies.

With its punishing award, the decision could shrink or even doom Jones’ Infowars media empire, which has been at the center of major conspiracy theories dating back to former President George W. Bush’s administration and was embraced by President Donald Trump.

The plaintiffs and their attorneys were visibly emotional when the jury’s decision were read. The decision marks a key moment in the years-long process that began in 2018 when the families took legal action against Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems, the parent of the fringe media organization Infowars.

Jones baselessly said again and again after the 2012 mass shooting, in which 26 people were killed, that the incident was staged, and that the families and first responders were “crisis actors.” The plaintiffs throughout the trial described in poignant terms how the lies had prompted unrelenting harassment against them and compounded the emotional agony of losing their loved ones.

Plaintiffs in the trial included family members of eight school students and employees, in addition to one FBI agent who responded to the scene. The three cases were all condensed into the single trial.

Jones was not in the courtroom for the verdict. He was streaming live when the jury’s decision was read in court, mocked the decision on his Infowars show and used it to fundraise.

It’s unclear when or how much of the money the plaintiffs will ultimately see. Jones has said that he will appeal the decision and during his Wednesday broadcast said that there “ain’t no money” to pay the massive figure the jury awarded the plaintiffs.

Christopher Mattei, an attorney for the plaintiffs, had urged jurors to award at least a half a billion dollars for having permanently mangled the lives of his clients. The figure, he said, would represent the more than 550 million online impressions Jones’ Sandy Hook lie allegedly received online.

“You may say that is astronomical. It is,” Mattei said. “It’s exactly what Alex Jones set himself up to do. That’s what he built. He built a lie machine that could push this stuff out. You reap what you sow.”

Mattei praised the jurors after the verdict was reached.

“The jury’s verdict is a testament to that courage, in a resounding affirmation that people of goodwill, dedicated to the truth, mindful of their responsibilities to their fellow citizens can come together to protect the innocent, to reveal lies masquerading as truth, and to set right a historic wrong,” Mattei told reporters outside the courthouse.

The decision in Connecticut comes two months after a separate jury in Texas determined that Jones and his company should award two Sandy Hook parents who sued in that state nearly $50 million. Later this month, the judge in that case will consider whether to reduce the punitive damages awarded under Texas law.

While Jones initially lied about the 2012 shooting, he later acknowledged that the massacre had occurred as he faced multiple lawsuits. But he failed to comply with court orders during the discovery process of the lawsuits in Connecticut and Texas, leading the families in each state to win default judgments against him.

During the latest trial, families of the Sandy Hook victims offered emotional testimony, telling the jury in haunting terms how Jones’ lies about the shooting had permanently altered their lives and compounded the pain of losing their loved ones.

Jones, who was cross-examined by the plaintiffs’ attorneys, but chose not to testify in his own defense as was originally planned, sought to portray himself as a victim of an elaborate “deep state” conspiracy against him.

In a particularly explosive moment in the trial, Jones tangled with an attorney for the plaintiffs, accusing him of “ambulance chasing,” before descending into an unhinged rant in court about “liberals.”

The judge overseeing the case admonished Jones several times during his testimony, warning him even at one point that he could be held in contempt of court if he violated her rules moving forward.

Jones has attacked the judicial process, even acknowledging in court that he had referred to the proceedings as those of a “kangaroo court” and called the judge a “tyrant.” He has already indicated that he plans to appeal.

This story has been updated with additional details.

Read original article here

Alex Jones should pay damages to Sandy Hook families, jury decides

(Pool/WFSB)

Robbie Parker, the father of 6-year-old Emilie Parker who was killed during the Sandy Hook shooting, said he was proud to stand among his fellow plaintiffs who got on the stand and told the truth.

“Everybody that took the stand told the truth, except for one. The one who proclaims that that’s what he does,” Parker said, referring to Alex Jones.

He credited his lawyers with helping to give him “the strength to finally find my voice and to fight and to stand up to what had been happening to me for so long.”

Speaking to the media after the verdict, Parker continued: “I let my voice be taken away from me and my power be taken away from me. At the expense of my daughter and at the expense of my family. So I have to thank them for helping me get the strength. And the families that I’ve been associated with for 10 years through this tragedy are the most beautiful people you’ll ever encounter, and their children and their moms and their wives are the most beautiful people you could ever get to know.”

“All I can really say is that I’m just proud that what we were able to accomplish is just to simply tell the truth and it shouldn’t be this hard, and it shouldn’t be this scary.”

Parker thanked the jury, not only because of the verdict, “but for what they had to endure, what they had to listen to.”

The jury awarded Parker $120,000,000 in compensatory damages in the case. 

Some background: In emotional testimony, Parker recounted the violent threats and harassment he and his family have suffered in the years after Jones called him a crisis actor.

The day after Emilie was murdered in the mass shooting, Parker gave a statement to the press. Hours later, Jones was on his InfoWars show describing Parker as a crisis actor to his audience of millions.

Later that night, unable to sleep, Parker said he saw the start of a deluge of hateful messages about the press conference on the Facebook memorial page for Emilie. Parker said he removed Emilie’s Facebook memorial page weeks after the shooting because the harassment was too much to control.

“I felt like I couldn’t protect Emilie’s name, or her memory anymore so I had to get rid of it,” Parker said through tears.

Read original article here

‘First Kill’ Canceled: Netflix Decides No Season 2 for Vampire Series

Netflix has driven a stake into “First Kill,” deciding against picking up the teenage vampire series for a second season. The news comes nearly two months after the streamer debuted all eight episodes of the show’s first season in early June.

Sources close to the matter maintain that Netflix is proud of the work that producers, cast and crew put in on the series, though the decision came down to a matter of viewing numbers versus cost.

Based on a short story from horror writer V. E. Schwab, “First Kill” followed Calliope (Imani Lewis) and Juliette (Sarah Catherine Hook), two teenage girls who fall for one another, but come from warring families: one a dynasty of vampire hunters, the other a line of bloodsuckers.

The series also starred Elizabeth Mitchell, Will Swenson, Aubion Wise, Jason Robert Moore, Gracie Dzienny, Dylan McNamara, Dominic Goodman, Phillip Mullings Jr., MK xyz, Jonas Dylan Allen and Roberto Mendez. Felicia D. Henderson and Schwab executive produced, alongside Emma Roberts and Karah Preiss for Belletrist Productions.

Critics were lukewarm on “First Kill,” with the series scoring a 58% approval rating from critics on review-aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes. Variety chief TV critic Caroline Framke expressed frustration about the show in her review, calling it “more of a clumsy swing at relevance than a tale anyone can really sink their teeth into.”

However, the series had garnered a dedicated following in the weeks since its premiere. In a post confirming the cancellation, series cast member Goodman expressed gratitude towards the show’s fanbase.

“I have nothing but love for every single one of you!” Goodman wrote. “Thank you all for taking the show in as your own, seeing you all feel seen made all the hard work and hours worth it.”



Read original article here

Monkeypox cases surge as WHO decides not to declare a global emergency

Placeholder while article actions load

The World Health Organization has decided not to declare monkeypox a global emergency despite a rapid rise in cases in Europe, electing instead to describe it as an “evolving health threat.”

The announcement Saturday comes after the WHO’s International Health Regulations Emergency Committee met last week to discuss whether the monkeypox outbreak should be labeled a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, or PHEIC, which would have marshaled new funding and spurred governments into action.

WHO weighs declaring monkeypox a global emergency as European cases surge

WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said the committee shared “serious concerns about the scale and speed of the current outbreak,” which, he said, spans more than 50 countries, with some 3,000 cases since early May.

The committee agreed the outbreak requires “coordinated action” to stop the further spread of the monkeypox virus using public health measures, including surveillance, contact-tracing, isolation and care of patients.

But there were differing views among committee members about whether the event yet constituted a health emergency of international concern — which is the highest level of alert the WHO can issue. The coronavirus, which causes covid-19, was labeled a PHEIC following a similar meeting in January 2020.

“Everybody’s tired of the COVID pandemic and nobody wants to hear about another sort of infectious-disease outbreak. But the point is, is that we’re sort of on the cusp of containment among men who have sex with men. … And to get us to where we need to go, we need global coordination and a global commitment,” said Gregg Gonsalves, an infectious-disease expert at the Yale School of Public Health, who believes monkeypox should be declared a global emergency now.

Gonsalves, a nonvoting adviser to the WHO’s emergency committee, said he is especially concerned about a possible spike in transmission during Pride celebrations occurring around the world through fall.

Monkeypox is spread through close contact and has so far primarily affected men who have sex with men. It begins with flu-like symptoms before fluid-filled lumps or lesions appear on the skin, which can leave behind permanent scarring. Health officials say that the latest outbreak has frequently brought genital rashes, and while most cases are mild and patients recover in three weeks, the virus can be fatal and is more of a risk to pregnant people or those with weakened immune systems.

The committee noted monkeypox has been circulating in a number of African countries for decades and has been neglected in terms of research, attention and funding — a point that has previously led some experts to suggest a double standard in the response to the outbreak in Europe.

“This must change not just for monkeypox but for other neglected diseases in low-income countries as the world is reminded yet again that health is an interconnected proposition,” Tedros said in a statement Saturday.

“What makes the current outbreak especially concerning is the rapid, continuing spread into new countries and regions and the risk of further, sustained transmission into vulnerable populations including people that are immunocompromised, pregnant women and children,” he added.

Tedros said Thursday that nearly 1,500 suspected cases of monkeypox, and some 70 deaths, have been reported in central Africa this year.

WHO to rename monkeypox after scientists call it ‘discriminatory’

In a separate statement Saturday, the WHO committee noted that “many aspects of the current multicountry outbreak are unusual,” including cases being recorded in countries where the virus had not been previously documented, “and the fact that the vast majority of cases is observed among men who have sex with men, of young age, not previously immunized against smallpox.”

The first case of monkeypox in the United States was detected May 17. Over the past five weeks, more than 100 cases have been added, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. California, New York and Illinois are listed as the states with the highest level of infection.

Some experts in the United States are calling on the White House to implement thorough testing to avoid the failures of the pandemic.

Britain has the highest reported number of infections outside Central and West Africa, with almost 800 cases of the virus recorded in the past month.

U.S. to expand monkeypox testing at commercial labs as outbreak grows

Jennifer Hassan in London contributed to this report.

Read original article here

Uvalde school board decides against disciplinary action for police chief whose orders delayed a tactical response to shooting

Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District Police Chief Pete Arredondo.CTV News

  • The Uvalde School Board decided not to pursue disciplinary action against Police Chief Pete Arredondo.

  • On May 24, an 18-year-old gunman shot and killed 21 people in an elementary school in Texas.

  • Arredondo has been criticized for delaying action against the gunman.

The Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District Board declined to take disciplinary action against District Police Chief Pete Arredondo during a meeting on Friday, Axios reported.

Arredondo has been under fire since the May 24 shooting at Robb Elementary, during which an 18-year-old gunman left 19 children and two adults dead.

The gunman had barricaded himself inside a classroom with children while Arredondo and 19 other officers spent over an hour waiting in a hallway outside.

Officials later told reporters that Arredondo was the one who decided officers should not confront the gunman because he believed the gunman was barricaded alone.

The Texas Department of Public Safety also accused Arredondo of not cooperating with an investigation into the incident.

Parents who waited outside during the gunfire reportedly tried to enter the school and save their children were handcuffed by police.

One parent managed to grab her two kids during the shooting. She later told CBS News that she was handcuffed and threatened by police for talking to the media about her experience with officers while trying to escape arrest and save her kids.

During the district board meeting, officials announced that students and staff will not return to the Robb Elementary campus, which is set to permanently close.

The school, Axios reported, will be moved to a new address, while the existing building would be turned into “something other than a school site,” Superintendent Hal Harrell said.

Read the original article on Insider

Read original article here

Mickelson decides not to defend title at PGA Championship

Phil Mickelson withdrew Friday from the PGA Championship, electing to extend his hiatus from golf following his incendiary comments he made about a Saudi-funded rival league he supports and the PGA Tour he accused of greed.

Mickelson authored one of the most stunning victories last year when he won the PGA at Kiawah Island, at age 50 becoming the oldest champion in 161 years of the majors.

Now, the popular phrase from a decade ago — “What will Phil do next?” — carries more intrigue than sheer excitement.

The PGA of America announced his decision on social media. The PGA Championship starts Thursday at Southern Hills Country Club in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Mickelson has not played since Feb. 6 at the Saudi International, where he accused the PGA Tour of “obnoxious greed” in an interview with Golf Digest.

Two weeks later, in an excerpt from Alan Shipnuck’s unauthorized biography to be released next week, Mickelson revealed how he had been working behind the scenes to promote the rival league funded by the Public Investment Fund and run by Greg Norman.

Mickelson dismissed Saudi Arabia’s human rights atrocities, including the killing of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, by saying it was worth it if it meant gaining leverage to get the changes he wanted on the PGA Tour.

Mickelson met the deadline to sign up for the PGA Championship on April 25, though his manager said it was more about keeping his options opened. He also entered the U.S. Open, and said he would ask for a conflicting event release to play the LIV Golf Invitational in London, the first of Norman’s $20 million tournaments.

The tour said earlier this week it would not grant any releases.

Mickelson is the first major champion not to defend his title since Rory McIlroy at St. Andrews in 2015 because of a knee injury from playing soccer.

He is only the third PGA champion not to defend his title in the last 75 years. Tiger Woods missed in 2008 while recovering from reconstructive knee surgery, and Ben Hogan couldn’t play in 1949 while recovering from his car getting struck by a bus.

Mickelson’s issues were self-inflicted.

“I personally think it’s an unbelievable mental challenge to come back and play after what he’s put himself through,” six-time major champion and CBS analyst Nick Faldo said on Wednesday. “I don’t think it’s as easy as just getting back on the bike and arriving at a golf tournament and playing. The attention is going to be monumental.”

Now the attention shifts to whether Mickelson will defy the tour by playing in London in three weeks, or if he would go to the U.S. Open, the only major he has never won.

His last time playing in America was at Torrey Pines on Jan. 28. He missed the cut.

Shipnuck’s book is scheduled to be released on Tuesday. Among the excerpt he already has published on his “Firepit Collective” site included Mickelson saying he recruited players to pay attorneys to write the operating agreement of a new league.

“We know they killed Khashoggi and have a horrible record on human rights. They execute people over there for being gay. Knowing all of this, why would I even consider it? Because this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reshape how the PGA Tour operates,” Mickelson said.

He referred to the PGA Tour and Commissioner Jay Monahan as a “dictatorship.”

“I’m not sure I event want it to succeed,” he said of the Saudi league. “But just the idea of it is allowing us to get things done with the tour.”

Mickelson swiftly lost corporate sponsors such as KPMG and Amstel Light, while Workday said it would not be renewing its deal with him. Mickelson released a statement in which he described his comment as “reckless” and apologized for his choice of words.

Mickelson said in his statement he has felt pressure and stress affecting him at a deeper level over the last 10 years and he needs time away.

But he did not say if he would be taking a break from golf. He has not played since the Saudi International on Feb. 6. He is not playing this week. His statement concluded, “I know I have not been my best and desperately need some time away to prioritize the ones I love most and work on being the man I want to be.”

“I know I have not been my best and desperately need some time away to prioritize the ones I love most and work on being the man I want to be,” he said in February.

Mickelson was replaced in the field by former Masters champion Charl Schwartzel.

___

More AP golf: https://apnews.com/hub/golf and https://twitter.com/AP_Sports



Read original article here

The Ultimate News Site